Night (as in darkness) is equivalent to IMC.
So “night VFR” is meaningless unless there is a lot of light around, in the sky and on the ground.
But there is! Even in Sweden, which is very sparsely populated compared to continental Europe and the UK, there are always sufficiently many lights on the ground. Ok, maybe not if you are flying in the “northern wilderness”, but anywhere south of 60°N, say.
Also, you don’t have to bother with IFR procedures and IFR navigation which is the really tricky part of IFR flying. Basic attitude flying using the AI is quickly mastered and that is taught even in the basic PPL. In Sweden at least.
I’ll clarify a bit 
taking off VFR (day) with 501 ft ceiling and 1500m visibility is legal when OCAS , but… not many people will do it.
so when you’re NVFR there’s many things beside full darkness :-)
Also, you don’t have to bother with IFR procedures and IFR navigation which is the really tricky part of IFR flying
You’d be surprised how easy that part is… compared to VFR. However, flying in Sweden and flying in continental Europe are quite different things. I must admit that the latter is almost as easy as flying IFR.
Night (as in darkness) is equivalent to IMC.
So “night VFR” is meaningless unless there is a lot of light around, in the sky and on the ground.
There is VMC and IMC, which pertains to conditions and there is VFR and IFR which pertains to flight rules one is operating under. In the FAR’s, 61.51 describes logging of flight conditions by day or night, actual instrument conditions, or simulated instrument conditions. One may be operating in VMC (conditions) under VFR (rules) and if they have to control the aircraft solely by reference to the instruments because it is dark, without lights on the ground, the sky is overcast so the stars can’t be seen, and there is no discernible horizon, then the pilot would log actual instrument conditions. In my experience, the vast majority of the night VMC time I log as Night and not also as actual instrument.
For reference, I have quoted definitions of various terms from the US Pilot Controller Glossary, there isn’t a definition of actual instrument conditions other than what I have read in various FAA General Counsel Opinions.
VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS− Meteorological conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling equal to or better than specified minima.
VISUAL FLIGHT RULES− Rules that govern the procedures for conducting flight under visual conditions. The term “VFR” is also used in the United States to indicate weather conditions that are equal to or greater than minimum VFR requirements. In addition, it is used by pilots and controllers to indicate type of flight plan.
INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS− Meteorological conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling less than the minima specified for visual meteorological conditions.
INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES− Rules governing the procedures for conducting instrument flight. Also a term used by pilots and controllers to indicate type of flight plan.
INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES [ICAO]− A set of rules governing the conduct of flight under instrument meteorological conditions.
When got my night rating in Norway, before JAR, I believe there was a distinction in the way you measure visibility between night and day. The difference being that the visibility of light is what is measured at night. Do not have access to regulations right now…
Night VFR rating would be nice to have, but with SERA and the IFR minima for altitude, there are no obvious way to interpret the rules in a hilly country like Norway where airports are placed in the valleys. I sent an e-mail to the CAA about 4-5 months ago asking how these new rules should be followed. I received an answer a month ago. They said they were having internal meetings on this particular issue. Haven’t heard anything since then.
A lot of people discover this when converting a Euro PPL to an FAA PPL. There is a 100nm night X/C flight for example; I had to arrange some hotels when I was doing mine because all the nearby airports closed too early to do it in one go.
Where did you do your FAA PPL? None of the airports local to where I used to live (Houston, Texas) used to ever close. OK, so the FBO might close, but you could still land there at 2am if you wanted. Even larger airports with ATC would just become non-towered after hours. I’ve never found an airport anywhere in the US that you can’t just land at after hours.
Where did you do your FAA PPL?
In the UK, 2004, using the JAA PPL logbook entries as far as possible, with a visiting DPE of Iranian origin The outfit through which it was done is long gone.
In the USA, I did just the IR (2006). The CPL was done again in the UK, c. 2008 and just months before the visiting DPE option was shut (almost) permanently.
Yes; in the USA everything to do with flying is much easier. But I really like Europe
In Canada, a night endorsement also requires instrument time, with a demonstration of keep it upright, and a 180 turn on instruments. I regularly depart runways, including my own, toward the east, where there are no lights visible at all, until you reach a few hundred feet AGL. Doing this does require some instrument flying discipline. Positive rate, and attitude well maintained, until an outside horizon is a useful reference.
I do fly higher at night, to avoid unlit prickly things on earth, and provide more time to manage an engine problem, before a forced landing is the only choice.
Other than that, night flying usually provides smoother air for a more comfortable ride, and with really good visibility, pilotage navigation can be easier than during the day
To get a Canadian Night Rating for VFR flying, you need 5 hours dual at night, and 5 hours solo, including a 2 hour cross country.
I believe this is quite a bit more than in Europe, isn’t it?
Yes, I had to fly a minimum of 5 hours, of which at least one was x-country; of these 5, at least 3 had to be dual. Also, had to complete at least 5 landings (dual) and 5 landings (solo)….
